CVE-2026-62982

CVE-2026-62982 is a high-severity OS command injection vulnerability in glances (pip), affecting versions >= 4.5.2, < 4.5.6. It is fixed in 4.5.6.

Does this CVE actually affect you?

Kodem shows which CVEs are reachable and running in your applications, so you fix what's exploitable, not just what's listed.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Runtime intelligence, not another scanner.

Summary

Glances: Incomplete fix of CVE-2026-32608: action-template sanitizer is bypassed by nested stat values (process 'cmdline') → OS command injection

CVE-2026-32608 ("Command Injection via Process Names in Action Command Templates") was fixed (commit 5680a5d) by adding _sanitize_mustache_dict, which replaces the shell operators &&, |, >>, > with spaces in the values rendered into action command templates.

The sanitizer only processes top-level string values (if isinstance(v, str)). Attacker-controlled nested values, most notably a process's cmdline, which Glances exposes as a list and which is fully attacker-controlled via argv, are passed through unsanitized. Because the Mustache renderer (chevron) does not HTML-escape the pipe character |, a | embedded in such a nested value survives into the rendered command and is then interpreted by secure_popen (which still interprets &&/|/> by default, allow_operators=True), re-introducing the exact command injection the CVE was meant to close.

Details

The fix (glances/actions.py):

_SHELL_OPERATORS = ('&&', '|', '>>', '>')                     # line 25

def _sanitize_mustache_dict(mustache_dict):                   # line 28
    ...
    for k, v in mustache_dict.items():
        if isinstance(v, str):                                # line 40  <-- ONLY top-level strings
            for op in _SHELL_OPERATORS:
                v = v.replace(op, ' ')
            safe[k] = v
        else:
            safe[k] = v                                       # nested list/dict passed VERBATIM
    return safe

Render + sink (glances/actions.py:104-111):

safe_dict = _sanitize_mustache_dict(mustache_dict)
cmd_full  = chevron.render(cmd, safe_dict)                    # chevron does NOT escape '|'
...
ret = secure_popen(cmd_full)                                 # secure_popen(cmd, allow_operators=True)

secure_popen (glances/secure.py:17, default allow_operators=True) splits the command by &&, then __secure_popen interprets | (pipe to a new process) and > (write output to a file). A surviving | therefore launches an attacker-named second process.

The attacker-controlled nested value, cmdline. The action mustache_dict is the per-item plugin stat (glances/plugins/plugin/model.py:931 mustache_dict = item, then :943 self.actions.run(..., mustache_dict=mustache_dict)). For the processlist plugin, each item contains cmdline, a list of the process arguments, set by the attacker simply by launching a process with chosen argv. The sanitizer's isinstance(v, str) test skips the list, so its elements reach chevron.render unmodified.

Why the operator survives render. chevron/Mustache HTML-escapes & < > " ' for {{var}} (so > and && are neutralized) but does not escape |. A pipe in the (unsanitized) nested value therefore reaches secure_popen intact and is interpreted.

Parent-fix attribution (verified against the real diff of commit 5680a5d / CVE-2026-32608): that fix added exactly _SHELL_OPERATORS, _sanitize_mustache_dict, and the _sanitize_mustache_dict(mustache_dict) call, and the sanitizer's docstring explicitly claims to neutralize "user-controllable data (process names, container names, mount points, etc.)". It does so only for top-level strings; the list/dict case (else: safe[k] = v) was left unsanitized. This is therefore a genuine incomplete-fix gap, not a re-report of the patched (top-level string) vector.

Proof of Concept

Lab-only, harmless (touches a marker file; non-destructive). Runs the real glances chain (_sanitize_mustache_dictchevron.rendersecure_popen), see poc/glances_nested_mustache_poc.py.

Attacker process argv (the only attacker input): cmdline = ['x', '|touch /tmp/glances_poc_marker', '#'].
Admin action template (renders the offending process's cmdline): echo ALERT {{#cmdline}}{{.}} {{/cmdline}}.

Observed (confirmed on develop HEAD 92156d0/4.5.6 and verified code-identical on v4.5.5):

cmdline after sanitizer : ['x', '|touch /tmp/glances_poc_marker', '#']   <- pipe survives
cmd_full -> secure_popen : 'echo ALERT x |touch /tmp/glances_poc_marker # '
[VULNERABLE] marker created -> /tmp/glances_poc_marker  (command injection executed)

Replacing touch /tmp/... with any command yields arbitrary execution in the Glances process context.

Preconditions (stated honestly)

  • A configured alert action whose command template renders a nested stat field (e.g. the process cmdline via a {{#cmdline}}…{{/cmdline}} section). Templates that render only flat string fields ({{name}}, {{value}}, {{username}}, {{mnt_point}}) are not affected, those values are sanitized.
  • Glances running with privilege to enumerate the attacker's process (typically root in server/agent monitoring deployments) → privilege boundary crossed (S:C).

Credit

Ta Duc Thien

Impact

A local unprivileged user gains OS command execution in the Glances security context (commonly root), the same impact and threat model as the parent CVE-2026-32608, re-enabled for any action template that renders a nested stat field. The injection is reliable once the (admin-set) template references such a field.

Untrusted input reaches a shell command, allowing arbitrary commands to run on the host. Typical impact: code execution in the application's environment.

CVE-2026-62982 has a CVSS score of 8.8 (High). The vector is requires local access, low privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (4.5.6); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Affected versions

glances (>= 4.5.2, < 4.5.6)

Security releases

glances → 4.5.6 (pip)

Kodem intelligence

Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.

Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.

Already deployed Kodem?

See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →

Remediation advice

  • Sanitize recursively, apply the operator stripping to strings inside lists and dicts, not only top-level str values.
  • And/or build the templated action as an argument list and run it via secure_popen(..., allow_operators=False) / shell=False without operator interpretation.
  • And/or also strip the pipe | (and treat all _SHELL_OPERATORS) on every rendered string regardless of nesting; do not rely on Mustache HTML-escaping (it does not escape |).

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is CVE-2026-62982? CVE-2026-62982 is a high-severity OS command injection vulnerability in glances (pip), affecting versions >= 4.5.2, < 4.5.6. It is fixed in 4.5.6. Untrusted input reaches a shell command, allowing arbitrary commands to run on the host.
  2. How severe is CVE-2026-62982? CVE-2026-62982 has a CVSS score of 8.8 (High). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
  3. Which versions of glances are affected by CVE-2026-62982? glances (pip) versions >= 4.5.2, < 4.5.6 is affected.
  4. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-62982? Yes. CVE-2026-62982 is fixed in 4.5.6. Upgrade to this version or later.
  5. Is CVE-2026-62982 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-62982 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
  6. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-62982 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
  7. How do I fix CVE-2026-62982? Upgrade glances to 4.5.6 or later.

Other vulnerabilities in glances

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.